Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, Volume. 58, Issue 2, 0200003(2021)
Objective Quality Assessment for Three-Dimensional Meshes
Figures & Tables(7)
Fig. 1. Original 3D meshes of LIRIS/EPFL general-purpose. (a) Armadillo;(b) Venus;(c) Dinosaur;(d) Rockerarm
Fig. 2. Original 3D meshes of LIRIS_Mask. (a) Armadillo;(b) Dinosaur;(c) Lion Head;(d) Bimba
Table 1. FR 3D mesh objective quality assessment method
View tableTable 1. FR 3D mesh objective quality assessment method
Type Principle Method FR Geometric distance HD[ 20 ], RMS[21 ]Geometric Laplacian GL1[ 22 ], GL2[23 ]Network structure MSDM[ 14 ]Multi-scale/structure MSDM2[ 24 ]Dihedral angle DAME[ 25 ]Curvature TPDM[ 26 ], Dong[27 ]
Table 2. RR 3D mesh objective quality assessment method
View tableTable 2. RR 3D mesh objective quality assessment method
Type Principle Method RR Global roughness 3DWPM1[ 28 ], 3DWPM2[29 ]Local roughness FMPD[ 30 ]Statistical distribution/ Dihedral angle KLD Gamma[ 31 ]KLD Weibull[ 31 ]
Table 3. NR 3D mesh objective quality assessment method
View tableTable 3. NR 3D mesh objective quality assessment method
Type Principle Method NR Statistical distribution/ Dihedral angle NR-SVR[ 32 ]Mean curvature/ Dihedral angle NR-SVR[ 33 ]Dihedral angle NR-SVR[ 11 ]Shape index/Curvedness/ Vertex scatter/Area NR-SVR[ 34 ]Graph spectral features/ Spatial features BMQA-GSES[ 35 ]
Table 4. Performance comparison of different methods on LIRIS/EPFL general-purpose database
View tableTable 4. Performance comparison of different methods on LIRIS/EPFL general-purpose database
Type Method PLCC /% SROCC /% FR HD[ 20 ]11.4 13.8 RMS[ 21 ]28.1 26.8 GL1[ 22 ]35.5 33.1 GL2[ 23 ]42.4 39.3 MSDM[ 14 ]75.0 73.9 MSDM2[ 24 ]81.4 80.4 DAME[ 25 ]75.2 76.6 TPDM[ 26 ]84.1 80.4 Dong[ 27 ]87.7 86.6 RR 3DWPM1[ 28 ]61.8 69.3 3DWPM2[ 29 ]49.6 49.0 FMPD[ 30 ]83.5 81.9 KLD Gamma[ 31 ]74.0 71.6 KLD Weibull[ 31 ]74.1 71.7 NR NR-SVR[ 32 ]87.8 81.5 NR-SVR[ 33 ]82.7 83.6 NR-SVR[ 11 ]86.8 84.6 NR-SVR[ 34 ]87.8 81.9 BMQA-GSES[ 35 ]90.5 87.9
Table 5. Performance comparison of different methods on LIRIS_Mask database
View tableTable 5. Performance comparison of different methods on LIRIS_Mask database
Type Method PLCC /% SROCC /% FR HD[ 20 ]20.2 26.6 RMS[ 21 ]41.2 48.8 GL1[ 22 ]39.6 42.0 GL2[ 23 ]38.3 40.1 MSDM[ 14 ]69.2 65.2 MSDM2[ 24 ]87.3 89.6 DAME[ 25 ]58.6 68.1 TPDM[ 26 ]88.6 90.0 Dong[ 27 ]92.6 92.5 RR 3DWPM1[ 28 ]31.9 29.4 3DWPM2[ 29 ]42.7 37.4 FMPD[ 30 ]80.8 80.2 KLD Gamma[ 31 ]64.0 74.3 KLD Weibull[ 31 ]74.6 66.6 NR NR-SVR[ 32 ]91.2 90.4 NR-SVR[ 33 ]85.4 88.2 NR-SVR[ 11 ]89.1 91.1 NR-SVR[ 34 ]90.1 60.0
Tools
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Yaoyao Lin, Mei Yu, Zhouyan He, Gangyi Jiang. Objective Quality Assessment for Three-Dimensional Meshes[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2021, 58(2): 0200003
Paper Information
Category: Reviews
Received: Jun. 1, 2020
Accepted: Jul. 7, 2020
Published Online: Jan. 11, 2021
The Author Email: Yu Mei (yumei2@126.com)
© Copyright 2018-2021 | Chinese Laser Press.
All Rights Reserved 沪ICP备15018463号-20